Twenty-four sections in the Scenic Heights subdivision in Scroggs Hill Rd were snapped up quickly when they went to market in late 2019.
However, lack of agreement about drainage in the area is an unresolved problem.
LJ Hooker real estate agent Jason Hynes confirmed titles had not been issued and the project was in limbo, but said he remained hopeful it would succeed.
The site still appealed to people who wanted to build their dream home there, he said.
A Dunedin City Council spokeswoman said the developer was considering options for stormwater disposal from the site.
‘‘With most large-scale developments, there are specific requirements which developers have to meet, including those relating to services such as stormwater disposal,’’ she said.
In the Brighton case, the initial plan for stormwater included infrastructure that was not suitable and the developer was ‘‘working through’’ other options.
Brighton resident Keith Newton said the subdivision project ran into trouble because of the way the landowner had interacted with neighbours.
Residents presented a 94-signature petition to the council in 2016 concerning zoning changes and a council consultation mistake.
The proposal outlined in the 2019 subdivision consent described 27 residential lots.
They would be large enough for one or two residential units per site.
A cul-de-sac had been planned but, after negotiations, the subdivision was redesigned and a loop road was favoured, which would result in two intersections with Scroggs Hill Rd.
In his advertising, Mr Hynes referred to sun-drenched lots with superb views.
‘‘With a noticeable shortage of residential land in Dunedin, this development will be very appealing to families wanting easy access to the beautiful Brighton beach, while also providing the additional benefit of being nicely elevated.’’
The subdivision consent was approved, subject to conditions, which included completion of a stormwater management plan.
The development had the potential to create adverse effects to downstream waterways and neighbouring properties, it was noted in the consent decision.
Landowner Frances Edmonds was approached for comment.
Related Stories
Comments
So the sites were sold before full approval for their storm water management. Now 24 hopeful buyers have lodged funds with the developer and assumed a successful outcome. They have ceased their search for alternative sites, potentially had plans drawn up and secured builders. The developer simply returns their deposit without compensation and will likely resolve the storm water issues then re release the sites at a later date and for a significantly higher value. Seems to me to be an unfair system, particularly when the DCC should have demanded a satisfactory storm water management plan before any promotion of the sites was allowed.
Not to mention the huge capital gain the developer will realise when this development does go through with new buyers sometime in the future.